Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 103 / Thursday, May 29, 2014 / Proposed Rules 30753 

(h) Terminating Action—Replacement of the 

Aft Baggage Bay Door Stop Fittings and 

Striker Plates 

Within 6,000 flight hours or 36 months, 

whichever occurs first, after the effective date 

of this AD, replace the affected stop fittings 

and striker plates, in accordance with the 

Accomplishment Instructions of Bombardier 

Service Bulletin 670BA–52–037, Revision B, 

dated September 16, 2013. Replacement of 

the affected stop fittings and striker plates of 

the aft baggage bay door constitutes 

terminating action for the repetitive 

inspections required by paragraph (g) of this 

AD. 

(i) Other FAA AD Provisions 

The following provisions also apply to this 

AD: 

(1) Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs): The Manager, New York Aircraft 

Certification Office (ACO), ANE–170, FAA, 

has the authority to approve AMOCs for this 

AD, if requested using the procedures found 

in 14 CFR 39.19. In accordance with 14 CFR 

39.19, send your request to your principal 

inspector or local Flight Standards District 

Office, as appropriate. If sending information 

directly to the ACO, send it to ATTN: 

Program Manager, Continuing Operational 

Safety, FAA, New York ACO, 1600 Stewart 

Avenue, Suite 410, Westbury, NY 11590; 

telephone 516–228–7300; fax 516–794–5531. 

Before using any approved AMOC, notify 

your appropriate principal inspector, or 

lacking a principal inspector, the manager of 

the local flight standards district office/

certificate holding district office. The AMOC 

approval letter must specifically reference 

this AD. 

(2) Airworthy Product: For any requirement 

in this AD to obtain corrective actions from 

a manufacturer, use these actions if they are 

FAA-approved. Corrective actions are 

considered FAA-approved if they were 

approved by the State of Design Authority (or 

its delegated agent, or the Design Approval 

Holder with a State of Design Authority’s 

design organization approval, as applicable). 

You are required to ensure the product is 

airworthy before it is returned to service. 

(j) Related Information 

(1) Refer to Mandatory Continuing 

Airworthiness Information (MCAI) Canadian 

Airworthiness Directive CF–2013–37, dated 

November 28, 2013, for related information. 

This MCAI may be found in the AD docket 

on the Internet at http://www.regulations.gov 

by searching for and locating Docket No. 

FAA–2014–0287. 

(2) For service information identified in 

this AD, contact Bombardier, Inc., 400 CoˆteVertu Road West, Dorval, Que ́bec H4S 1Y9, 

Canada; telephone 514–855–5000; fax 514– 

855–7401; email thd.crj@

aero.bombardier.com; Internet http://

www.bombardier.com. You may view this 

service information at the FAA, Transport 

Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., 

Renton, WA. For information on the 

availability of this material at the FAA, call 

425–227–1221. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on May 16, 

2014. 

Michael Kaszycki, 

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2014–12473 Filed 5–28–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2014–0288; Directorate 

Identifier 2013–NM–101–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing 

Company Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: We propose to adopt a new 

airworthiness directive (AD) for certain 

The Boeing Company Model DC–9–10, 

DC–9–20, and DC–9–30 series airplanes. 

This proposed AD was prompted by an 

evaluation by the design approval 

holder (DAH) indicating that the 

improved (shot-peened) aft fuselage 

non-ventral pressure bulkhead tee is 

subject to widespread fatigue damage 

(WFD). This proposed AD would 

require repetitive inspections for 

cracking of the improved (shot-peened) 

non-ventral aft pressure bulkhead tees, 

and replacement if necessary. We are 

proposing this AD to detect and correct 

fatigue cracking of the improved (shotpeened) non-ventral aft pressure 

bulkhead dome tees connecting the 

bulkhead web to the fuselage, which 

could result in reduced structural 

integrity and rapid decompression of 

the airplane. 

DATES: We must receive comments on 

this proposed AD by July 14, 2014. 

ADDRESSES: You may send comments, 

using the procedures found in 14 CFR 

11.43 and 11.45, by any of the following 

methods: 

• Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to 

http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the 

instructions for submitting comments. 

• Fax: 202–493–2251. 

• Mail: U.S. Department of 

Transportation, Docket Operations, M– 

30, West Building Ground Floor, Room 

W12–140, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., 

Washington, DC 20590. 

• Hand Delivery: Deliver to Mail 

address above between 9 a.m. and 5 

p.m., Monday through Friday, except 

Federal holidays. 

For service information identified in 

this proposed AD, contact Boeing 

Commercial Airplanes, Attention: Data 

& Services Management, 3855 

Lakewood Boulevard, MC D800–0019, 

Long Beach, CA 90846–0001; telephone 

206–544–5000, extension 2; fax 206– 

766–5683; Internet https://

www.myboeingfleet.com. You may view 

this referenced service information at 

the FAA, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, 1601 Lind Avenue SW., 

Renton, WA. For information on the 

availability of this material at the FAA, 

call 425–227–1221. 

Examining the AD Docket 

You may examine the AD docket on 

the Internet at http://

www.regulations.gov by searching for 

and locating Docket No. FAA–2014– 

0288; or in person at the Docket 

Management Facility between 9 a.m. 

and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

except Federal holidays. The AD docket 

contains this proposed AD, the 

regulatory evaluation, any comments 

received, and other information. The 

street address for the Docket Office 

(phone: 800–647–5527) is in the 

ADDRESSES section. Comments will be 

available in the AD docket shortly after 

receipt. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Eric 

Schrieber, Aerospace Engineer, 

Airframe Branch, ANM–120L, FAA, Los 

Angeles Aircraft Certification Office, 

3960 Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, 

CA 90712–4137; phone: 562–627–5348; 

fax: 562–627–5210; email: 

eric.schrieber@faa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Comments Invited 

We invite you to send any written 

relevant data, views, or arguments about 

this proposal. Send your comments to 

an address listed under the ADDRESSES

section. Include ‘‘Docket No. FAA– 

2014–0288; Directorate Identifier 2013– 

NM–101–AD’’ at the beginning of your 

comments. We specifically invite 

comments on the overall regulatory, 

economic, environmental, and energy 

aspects of this proposed AD. We will 

consider all comments received by the 

closing date and may amend this 

proposed AD because of those 

comments. 

We will post all comments we 

receive, without change, to http://

www.regulations.gov, including any 

personal information you provide. We 

will also post a report summarizing each 

substantive verbal contact we receive 

about this proposed AD. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
30754 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 103 / Thursday, May 29, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

Discussion 

Structural fatigue damage is 

progressive. It begins as minute cracks, 

and those cracks grow under the action 

of repeated stresses. This can happen 

because of normal operational 

conditions and design attributes, or 

because of isolated situations or 

incidents such as material defects, poor 

fabrication quality, or corrosion pits, 

dings, or scratches. Fatigue damage can 

occur locally, in small areas or 

structural design details, or globally. 

Global fatigue damage is general 

degradation of large areas of structure 

with similar structural details and stress 

levels. Multiple-site damage is global 

damage that occurs in a large structural 

element such as a single rivet line of a 

lap splice joining two large skin panels. 

Global damage can also occur in 

multiple elements such as adjacent 

frames or stringers. Multiple-sitedamage and multiple-element-damage 

cracks are typically too small initially to 

be reliably detected with normal 

inspection methods. Without 

intervention, these cracks will grow, 

and eventually compromise the 

structural integrity of the airplane, in a 

condition known as WFD. As an 

airplane ages, WFD will likely occur, 

and will certainly occur if the airplane 

is operated long enough without any 

intervention. 

The FAA’s WFD final rule (75 FR 

69746, November 15, 2010) became 

effective on January 14, 2011. The WFD 

rule requires certain actions to prevent 

structural failure due to WFD 

throughout the operational life of 

certain existing transport category 

airplanes and all of these airplanes that 

will be certificated in the future. For 

existing and future airplanes subject to 

the WFD rule, the rule requires that 

DAHs establish a limit of validity (LOV) 

of the engineering data that support the 

structural maintenance program. 

Operators affected by the WFD rule may 

not fly an airplane beyond its LOV, 

unless an extended LOV is approved. 

The WFD rule (75 FR 69746, 

November 15, 2010) does not require 

identifying and developing maintenance 

actions if the DAHs can show that such 

actions are not necessary to prevent 

WFD before the airplane reaches the 

LOV. Many LOVs, however, do depend 

on accomplishment of future 

maintenance actions. As stated in the 

WFD rule, any maintenance actions 

necessary to reach the LOV will be 

mandated by airworthiness directives 

through separate rulemaking actions. 

In the context of WFD, this action is 

necessary to enable DAHs to propose 

LOVs that allow operators the longest 

operational lives for their airplanes, and 

still ensure that WFD will not occur. 

This approach allows for an 

implementation strategy that provides 

flexibility to DAHs in determining the 

timing of service information 

development (with FAA approval), 

while providing operators with certainty 

regarding the LOV applicable to their 

airplanes. 

We received reports indicating that 

the improved tee sections are subject to 

widespread fatigue damage (WFD). This 

condition, if not corrected, could result 

in reduced structural integrity and rapid 

decompression of the airplane. 

Relevant Service Information 

We reviewed McDonnell Douglas DC– 

9 Alert Service Bulletin A53–231, 

Revision 2, dated June 25, 1993. For 

information on the procedures and 

repetitive compliance times, see this 

service information at http://

www.regulations.gov by searching for 

Docket No. FAA–2014–0288. 

FAA’s Determination 

We are proposing this AD because we 

evaluated all the relevant information 

and determined the unsafe condition 

described previously is likely to exist or 

develop in other products of these same 

type designs. 

Proposed AD Requirements 

This proposed AD would require 

accomplishing repetitive inspections of 

the improved (shot-peened) non-ventral 

aft pressure bulkhead tees as specified 

in the service information described 

previously, except as discussed under 

‘‘Differences Between this Proposed AD 

and the Service Information.’’ 

Differences Between This Proposed AD 

and the Service Information 

Although McDonnell Douglas DC–9 

Alert Service Bulletin A53–231, 

Revision 2, dated June 25, 1993, 

recommends accomplishing the 

inspections between 300 and 1,500 

flight cycles ‘‘from issue date of 

Revision 1 of this Service Bulletin,’’ this 

proposed AD specifies variable 

compliance times depending on when 

the tee was installed. The compliance 

times for this proposed AD differ from 

those specified in McDonnell Douglas 

DC–9 Alert Service Bulletin A53–231, 

Revision 2, dated June 25, 1993, because 

it has been determined that the new 

improved tees could crack before the 

part’s LOV is reached. 

Although McDonnell Douglas DC–9 

Alert Service Bulletin A53–231, 

Revision 2, dated June 25, 1993, 

describes inspection procedures for the 

original design tees, the inspection 

procedures also apply to the improved 

(shot-peened) tees specified in this 

proposed AD. 

Although McDonnell Douglas DC–9 

Alert Service Bulletin A53–231, 

Revision 2, dated June 25, 1993, notes 

that replacing an original tee section 

with a new improved tee section 

eliminates the need for the repetitive 

inspections for that tee section, this 

proposed AD would not allow that 

terminating action. We have determined 

that the inspections must be repetitively 

performed because the new improved 

tee could crack before the airplane’s 

LOV is reached. 

Although McDonnell Douglas Alert 

DC–9 Service Bulletin A53–231, 

Revision 2, dated June 25, 1993, notes 

that replacing all six original tee 

sections with new improved tee sections 

eliminates the need for the repetitive 

inspections, this proposed AD would 

not allow that terminating action 

because the new improved tee could 

crack before the airplane’s LOV is 

reached. 

Although Table 1 of Figure 4, and 

paragraph 3, ‘‘Material Information,’’ of 

McDonnell Douglas DC–9 Alert Service 

Bulletin A53–231, Revision 2, dated 

June 25, 1993, specifies doubler 

configuration part numbers (P/Ns) 

SR09530056–3, SR09530056–5, 

SR09530056–6, SR09530056–7, 

SR09530056–8, SR09530056–9, 

5910163–387, 5910163–389, 5910163– 

391, 5910163–392, 5910163–393, and 

5910163–394, the correct part numbers 

are identified in paragraphs (h) and (k) 

of this proposed AD. 

These differences have been 

coordinated with The Boeing Company. 

Related Rulemaking 

AD 89–06–04, Amendment 39–6152 

(54 FR 11167, March 17, 1989), requires 

repetitive inspections of the original tee 

section having P/Ns 5910163–89, 

5910163–91, 5910163–92, 5910163–93, 

5910163–94, and 5910163–95, in 

accordance with McDonnell Douglas 

DC–9 Alert Service Bulletin A53–231, 

Revision 2, dated June 25, 1993, for 

McDonnell Douglas Model DC–9–10 

through –30 series and C–9 (Military) 

series airplanes equipped with a nonventral aft pressure bulkhead. AD 89– 

06–04 requires that the inspections be 

repeated whether or not the tee is 

replaced. 

Explanation of Compliance Time 

The compliance time for the 

replacement specified in this proposed 

AD for addressing WFD was established 

to ensure that discrepant structure is 

replaced before WFD develops in 

airplanes. Standard inspection 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 103 / Thursday, May 29, 2014 / Proposed Rules 30755 

techniques cannot be relied on to detect 

WFD before it becomes a hazard to 

flight. We will not grant any extensions 

of the compliance time to complete any 

AD-mandated service bulletin related to 

WFD without extensive new data that 

would substantiate and clearly warrant 

such an extension. 

Costs of Compliance 

We estimate that this proposed AD 

affects 48 airplanes of U.S. registry. We 

estimate the following costs to comply 

with this proposed AD: 

ESTIMATED COSTS

Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per product Cost on U.S. operators 

Inspection ............................... Up to 148 work-hours × $85 

per hour = $12,580 per inspection cycle.

$0 $12,580 per inspection cycle Up to $603,840 per inspection 

cycle. 

We estimate the following costs to do 

any necessary replacements that would 

be required based on the results of the 

proposed inspection. We have no way of 

determining the number of aircraft that 

might need these replacements: 

ON-CONDITION COSTS

Action Labor cost Parts cost Cost per 

product 

Replacement (per tee) .................................................. 4,000 work-hours × $85 per hour = $340,000 ............. $26,000 $366,000 

Authority for This Rulemaking 

Title 49 of the United States Code 

specifies the FAA’s authority to issue 

rules on aviation safety. Subtitle I, 

section 106, describes the authority of 

the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII: 

Aviation Programs, describes in more 

detail the scope of the Agency’s 

authority. 

We are issuing this rulemaking under 

the authority described in Subtitle VII, 

Part A, Subpart III, Section 44701: 

‘‘General requirements.’’ Under that 

section, Congress charges the FAA with 

promoting safe flight of civil aircraft in 

air commerce by prescribing regulations 

for practices, methods, and procedures 

the Administrator finds necessary for 

safety in air commerce. This regulation 

is within the scope of that authority 

because it addresses an unsafe condition 

that is likely to exist or develop on 

products identified in this rulemaking 

action. 

Regulatory Findings 

We determined that this proposed AD 

would not have federalism implications 

under Executive Order 13132. This 

proposed AD would not have a 

substantial direct effect on the States, on 

the relationship between the national 

Government and the States, or on the 

distribution of power and 

responsibilities among the various 

levels of government. 

For the reasons discussed above, I 

certify this proposed regulation: 

(1) Is not a ‘‘significant regulatory 

action’’ under Executive Order 12866, 

(2) Is not a ‘‘significant rule’’ under 

the DOT Regulatory Policies and 

Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 

1979), 

(3) Will not affect intrastate aviation 

in Alaska, and 

(4) Will not have a significant 

economic impact, positive or negative, 

on a substantial number of small entities 

under the criteria of the Regulatory 

Flexibility Act. 

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation 

safety, Incorporation by reference, 

Safety. 

The Proposed Amendment 

Accordingly, under the authority 

delegated to me by the Administrator, 

the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part 

39 as follows: 

PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS 

DIRECTIVES 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 39 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701. 

§ 39.13 [Amended] 

■ 2. The FAA amends § 39.13 by adding 

the following new airworthiness 

directive (AD): 

The Boeing Company: Docket No. FAA– 

2014–0288; Directorate Identifier 2013–NM– 

101–AD. 

(a) Comments Due Date 

We must receive comments by July 14, 

2014. 

(b) Affected ADs 

None. 

(c) Applicability 

This AD applies to The Boeing Company 

Model DC–9–11, DC–9–12, DC–9–13, DC–9– 

14, DC–9–15, and DC–9–15F airplanes; 

Model DC–9–21 airplanes; and Model DC–9– 

31, DC–9–32, DC–9–32 (VC–9C), DC–9–32F, 

DC–9–33F, DC–9–34, DC–9–34F, and DC–9– 

32F (C–9A, C–9B) airplanes; certificated in 

any category; equipped with a non-ventral aft 

pressure bulkhead. 

(d) Subject 

Air Transport Association (ATA) of 

America Code 53, Fuselage. 

(e) Unsafe Condition 

This AD was prompted by an evaluation by 

the design approval holder (DAH) indicating 

that the improved (shot-peened) non-ventral 

aft pressure bulkhead tee is subject to 

widespread fatigue damage (WFD). We are 

issuing this AD to detect and correct fatigue 

cracking of the improved (shot-peened) nonventral aft pressure bulkhead tees connecting 

the bulkhead web to the fuselage, which 

could result in reduced structural integrity 

and rapid decompression of the airplane. 

(f) Compliance 

Comply with this AD within the 

compliance times specified, unless already 

done. 

(g) Definitions 

(1) For the purposes of this AD, the term 

‘‘original tee section’’ refers to the original 

(non-peened) non-ventral aft pressure 

bulkhead web to fuselage skin attach tee 

sections. 

(2) For the purposes of this AD, the term 

‘‘improved tee section’’ refers to improved 

(shot peened) non-ventral aft pressure 

bulkhead web to fuselage skin attach tee 

sections. 

(h) Inspection 

For airplanes on which an improved tee 

section having P/N 5910163–257, 5910163– 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS
30756 Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 103 / Thursday, May 29, 2014 / Proposed Rules 

259, 5910163–260, 5910163–261, 5910163– 

262, 5910163–263, SR09530001–3, 

SR09530001–5, SR09530001–6, 

SR09530001–7, SR09530001–8, 

SR09530001–9, SR09530001–29, 

SR09530001–30, SR09530001–31, 

SR09530001–32, SR09530001–33, 

SR09530001–35, SR09530056–3, 

SR09530056–5, SR09530056–6, 

SR09530056–7, SR09530056–8, 

SR09530056–9, SR09530056–11, 

SR09530056–13, SR09530056–14, 

SR09530056–15, SR09530056–16, 

SR09530056–17, SR09530056–19, 

SR09530056–21, SR09530056–22, 

SR09530056–23, SR09530056–24, or 

SR09530056–25, is installed: At the 

applicable time specified in paragraph (i)(1) 

or (i)(2) of this AD, do a general visual and 

low frequency eddy current (LFEC) 

inspection (Option I), or a high and low 

frequency eddy current inspection (Option 

II), for cracking of the improved tee sections, 

in accordance with the Accomplishment 

Instructions of McDonnell Douglas DC–9 

Alert Service Bulletin A53–231, Revision 2, 

dated June 25, 1993, including Service 

Sketch 3683D, Revision C, dated July 19, 

1989. 

(i) Compliance Times 

(1) For Option I and Option II inspections 

specified in paragraph (h) of this AD: If the 

time of installation of an improved tee 

section having a part number listed in 

paragraph (h) of this AD is known, do the 

initial inspection required by paragraph (h) 

of this AD within 50,000 flight cycles after 

installation of the improved tee section, or 

within 1,500 flight cycles after the effective 

date of this AD, whichever occurs later. 

(2) For Option I and Option II inspections 

specified in paragraph (h) of this AD: If the 

time of installation of an improved tee 

section having a part number identified in 

paragraph (h) of this AD is not known, do the 

initial inspection required by paragraph (h) 

of this AD before the accumulation of 75,000 

total flight cycles, or within 1,500 flight 

cycles after the effective date of this AD, 

whichever occurs later. 

(j) Repetitive Inspections 

If no cracking is found during the 

inspection required by paragraph (h) of this 

AD: Do the actions specified in paragraph 

(j)(1) or (j)(2) of this AD, as applicable, in 

accordance with the Accomplishment 

Instructions of McDonnell Douglas DC–9 

Alert Service Bulletin A53–231, Revision 2, 

dated June 25, 1993, including Service 

Sketch 3683D, Revision C, dated July 19, 

1989. 

(1) For Option I: If Option I was used for 

the inspection required by paragraph (h) of 

this AD, do the actions at the applicable 

intervals, as specified in paragraphs (j)(1)(i), 

(j)(1)(ii), and (j)(1)(iii) of this AD. 

(i) Repeat the LFEC inspection for cracking 

of the side areas above the floor between 

longerons L7 and L17 on the fuselage left and 

right sides, at intervals not to exceed 2,000 

flight cycles. 

(ii) Repeat the general visual inspection for 

cracking of the top and lower areas from 

longeron L7 left side to L7 right side, and 

lower fuselage longeron L17 to L20 on the 

fuselage left and right sides, at intervals not 

to exceed 1,500 flight cycles. 

(iii) Repeat the general visual inspection 

for cracking of the bottom areas from 

longeron L20 left side to L20 right side, at 

intervals not to exceed 3,500 flight cycles. 

(2) For Option II: If Option II was used for 

the inspection required by paragraph (h) of 

this AD, repeat the high and low eddy 

frequency eddy current inspections for 

cracking around the entire periphery of the 

fuselage from the forward side of the 

bulkhead at intervals not to exceed 2,500 

flight cycles. 

(k) Corrective Action and Post-Replacement 

Inspections 

If any cracking is found during any 

inspection required by paragraph (h) or (j) of 

this AD: Before further pressurized flight, 

replace each cracked tee section with an 

airworthy tee section having a part number 

identified in paragraph (h) of this AD, or with 

an original tee section having P/N 5910163– 

89, 5910163–91, 5910163–92, 5910163–93, 

5910163–94, or 5910163–95, in accordance 

with the Accomplishment Instructions of 

McDonnell Douglas DC–9 Alert Service 

Bulletin A53–231, Revision 2, dated June 25, 

1993, including Service Sketch 3683D, 

Revision C, dated July 19, 1989. 

(1) If the tee section is replaced with an 

improved tee section listed in paragraph (h) 

of this AD, prior to the accumulation of 

50,000 flight cycles after installation, inspect 

the tee section in accordance with paragraph 

(h) of this AD and do all applicable corrective 

actions and repetitive inspections in 

accordance with and at the times specified in 

paragraphs (j) and (k) of this AD. 

(2) If the tee section is replaced with an 

original tee section listed in paragraph (k) of 

this AD, prior to the accumulation of 25,000 

flight cycles after installation, inspect the tee 

section in accordance with paragraph (h) of 

this AD and do all applicable corrective 

actions and repetitive inspections in 

accordance with and at the times specified in 

paragraphs (j) and (k) of this AD. 

(l) Alternative Methods of Compliance 

(AMOCs) 

(1) The Manager, Los Angeles Certification 

Office (ACO), FAA, has the authority to 

approve AMOCs for this AD, if requested 

using the procedures found in 14 CFR 39.19. 

In accordance with 14 CFR 39.19, send your 

request to your principal inspector or local 

Flight Standards District Office, as 

appropriate. If sending information directly 

to the manager of the ACO, send it to the 

attention of the person identified in 

paragraph (m)(1) of this AD. Information may 

be emailed to: 9-ANM-LAACO-AMOCREQUESTS@faa.gov. 

(2) Before using any approved AMOC, 

notify your appropriate principal inspector, 

or lacking a principal inspector, the manager 

of the local flight standards district office/

certificate holding district office. 

(3) An AMOC that provides an acceptable 

level of safety may be used for any repair 

required by this AD if it is approved by the 

Boeing Commercial Airplanes Organization 

Designation Authorization (ODA) that has 

been authorized by the Manager, Los Angeles 

ACO, to make those findings. For a repair 

method to be approved, the repair must meet 

the certification basis of the airplane and 14 

CFR 25.571, Amendment 45, and the 

approval must specifically refer to this AD. 

(m) Related Information 

(1) For more information about this AD, 

contact Eric Schrieber, Aerospace Engineer, 

Airframe Branch, ANM–120L, FAA, Los 

Angeles Aircraft Certification Office, 3960 

Paramount Boulevard, Lakewood, CA 90712– 

4137; phone: 562–627–5348; fax: 562–627– 

5210; email: eric.schrieber@faa.gov. 

(2) For service information identified in 

this AD, contact Boeing Commercial 

Airplanes, Attention: Data & Services 

Management, 3855 Lakewood Boulevard, MC 

D800–0019, Long Beach, CA 90846–0001; 

telephone 206–544–5000, extension 2; fax 

206–766–5683; Internet https://

www.myboeingfleet.com. You may view this 

referenced service information at the FAA, 

Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind 

Avenue SW., Renton, WA. For information 

on the availability of this material at the 

FAA, call 425–227–1221. 

Issued in Renton, Washington, on May 16, 

2014. 

Michael Kaszycki, 

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane 

Directorate, Aircraft Certification Service. 

[FR Doc. 2014–12475 Filed 5–28–14; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910–13–P 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39 

[Docket No. FAA–2014–0289; Directorate 

Identifier 2013–NM–146–AD] 

RIN 2120–AA64 

Airworthiness Directives; The Boeing 

Company Airplanes 

AGENCY: Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA), DOT. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 

(NPRM). 

SUMMARY: We propose to supersede 

Airworthiness Directive (AD) 2012–13– 

08, which applies to certain The Boeing 

Company Model 747–100, 747–100B, 

747–200B, 747–200C, 747–200F, 747– 

400F, 747SR, and 747SP series 

airplanes, without a stretched upper 

deck or stretched upper deck 

modification. AD 2012–13–08 currently 

requires repetitive inspections of 

tension ties and surrounding structure 

for cracking, additional inspections for 

certain airplanes, and related 

investigative and corrective actions if 

necessary. AD 2012–13–08 also 

currently requires modification of 

tension tie structure or tension tie and 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with PROPOSALS